FYI: The ALPS Medical Breakthroughs ETF (NYSEMKT: SBIO) debuted on the market Wednesday, December 31, 2014. This exchange traded fund will track the Poliwogg Medical Breakthroughs Index (PMBI), which is designed to capture research and development opportunities in biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. The PMBI is made up of small-cap and mid-cap biotech stocks listed on U.S. exchanges.
Regards,
Ted
http://247wallst.com/healthcare-business/2014/12/31/new-biotech-etf-hits-the-market/print/
ALPS Website: http://www.alpsfunds.com/overview/SBIO

David makes an excellent point about doing Roth conversions. So long as one does not jump into the next tax bracket (or enter AMT territory) this is a good way to "add" money to IRAs - thus moving money from taxable accounts to tax-free accounts.
The rest of this is detail, but an attempt to explain that last comment:
Say you have $100 in a traditional IRA. It is worth $75 post tax (25% bracket).
Say you have $25 in a taxable account.
Your total after tax worth is $100.
Pay the tax on the IRA now (convert it to a Roth).
You now have $100 in a Roth, worth $100.
Your total after tax worth is $100.
The difference is that all earnings on top of that $100 after-tax value are tax free. And you have the flexibility to make changes in your investments with no tax consequences (unlike the situation if that $25 were in a taxable account).

My 401Ks, Roth IRA and other tax deferred accounts are maxed out with primarily tax inefficient funds, bond funds, etc. I repeated myself about not "swinging for the fences" because someone apparently missed out on that concept or chose to ignore it because it doesn't fit with his larger point, or lack thereof. Thanks for attempting to interpret TB's analogy. I've been on this board for quite some time and understand his MO. Sometimes he makes great points, sometimes not.
As for contacting a competent CFP, I have yet to do so. I've had conversations with Fidelity and they always try to steer me into Fidelity funds and charge a 1% fee annually for their investing services. Another CFP tried to steer me into load funds and annuities, which didn't sit well with me. So, I've had no luck yet on that front. I may hunt around again in the new year.
BTW, I mentioned my tax bracket once, David. Anyway, Happy New Year and thanks for taking the time to comment !

FYI: For the last 20 years there has been a steadily consistent rule of thumb by America's financial planners when it comes to retirement — the 4% rule.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/brooks/2014/12/30/retirement-401k-pension/20774021/

FYI: Get an inside look into what some of the best investment themes may be for the new year.
Regards,
Ted
https://www.fidelity.com/viewpoints/investing-ideas/investing-ideas-for-2015

In approving the renewal of the adviser's contract last month, the board of trustees noted that while the fund lagged just about everyone for the past 1, 3, 5, and 10 year periods, 75% of the money in the fund was the manager's so he had all the incentive in the world to manage it to the best of his ability. (sigh)
David

BIRMX lost 21.54% for the 2014 (as of 12/30/14) based on the transfer agents' records on their web site:
http://www.mutualss.com/currentprices.aspx
Also, the fund has been closed for years to new investors. So if the fund is closed to new investors, where is the new money suppose to come from to grow its asset base?

"John, you're not putting new money into the fund with a reinvestment of a cg distribution. You have exactly the same investment you had before, except that you've picked up early tax liability for some of the fund's gains. "
Agree, but I am talking about after the fact. Money wise, it's a wash but you end up with more shares. As time goes on those added shares help to grow the investment. Granted, you need to hold the fund or investment for a period of time.
A mythical example; Say If you bought 100 shares of a fund and never bought another share, and that fund declares distributions regularly. After 10-15 or so years you end up with 120 shares. While you did not make money on those distributions, those extra 20 shares are working for you, hopefully in your favor.

Double digit returns again in 2014!, what part of that "doesn't work" I think a few need reality checks

Hi AKAFlack,
Thank you for gracing this discussion. Your welcomed contributions are always thought provoking, sometimes provocative, but consistently add to an investor’s perspective.
Thank you also for your generous and kind words with regard to my own submittals. I try very hard to make them accurate, informative, and stimulating.
Although we differ in several dimensions of investing policy and practice, our infrequent exchanges have been respectful and on-target subject wise. Your comments are cogent and often actionable. I only regret their infrequency.
Perhaps the market writer that you semi-quoted was Morgan Housel, perhaps not.
A few days earlier, I posted his WSJ article titled “16 Rules for Investors to Live By”. His rule number 16 from that piece is: “You are only diversified if some of your investments are performing worse than others.”
Other financial writers and advisors have published a score of perturbations of this popular investment rule. By the way, I too do not know the accepted rules-of-the-road with regard to near quotes.
I agree completely with your observation that much of market writings can be distilled down to a few golden guidelines. Long term patience, real diversification with products having low and persistent correlation coefficients, and a conservative money management plan are excellent starting attributes for successful investing. These are somewhat dull platitudes, but historical data demonstrates that they work. I try to practice them.
Regardless of your own investing proclivities, I admire your class teaching discipline. I’m sure your students learn much from the principles that you share with them. Teaching in a neutral manner, without taking a strong adversarial position, is a difficult balancing task. Familiarizing your students with the odds/likely rewards tradeoffs will make them better investors. Congratulations.
I’m not sure I understand your specific meaning, but you introduced a terrific new word, “antiperistasis”, to me. Once I get to comprehend its nuanced definition, I’ll try to add it to my vocabulary. That’s likely to take time.
Great fun. Please don’t be a stranger. I’ll profit from your postings as I have in past exchanges. So will the MFO discussion panel.
My Very Highest Regards.

@MFO Members: A another member of the 100% percentile club. Goof riddance !
Happy New Year
Ted

FYI: Rahul Seksaria, a money manager at Pacific Investment Management Co. running inflation-protection strategies, left the firm this month, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/print/2014-12-30/pimco-s-rahul-seksaria-said-to-depart-as-manager-of-funds.html

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1527446/000116204414001548/hagin497201412.htm
497 1 hagin497201412.htm
HAGIN KEYSTONE MARKET NEUTRAL FUND A series of Cottonwood Mutual Funds Supplement dated December 30, 2014 to the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Informationeach dated June 30, 2014 (as supplemented from time to time)
The below information was provided to shareholders of the HAGIN Keystone Market Neutral Fund (the “Fund”) on or about December 16, 2014. Effective December 30, 2014, the closing date of the liquidation of the Fund is changed to January 15, 2015. All references in the below information to December 30, 2014 are hereby replaced with January 15, 2015.
* * * * * * * *
The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of Cottonwood Mutual Funds (the “Trust”) has approved a Plan of Liquidation (the “Plan”) relating to the HAGIN Keystone Market Neutral Fund (the “Fund”), effective December 16, 2014. HAGIN Investment Management, the Fund’s investment adviser (the “Adviser”), has recommended to the Board to approve the Plan based on its representations of its inability to market the Fund and the Adviser’s indication that it does not desire to continue to support the Fund. As a result, the Board has concluded that it is in the best interest of the Fund’s shareholders to liquidate the Fund.
In connection with the proposed liquidation and dissolution of the Fund called for by the Plan, the Board has directed the Trust’s principal underwriter to cease offering shares of the Fund immediately as of the date of this Supplement. Shareholders may continue to reinvest dividends and distributions in the Fund or redeem their shares until the liquidation.
It is anticipated that the Fund will liquidate on or about December 30, 2014. Any remaining shareholders on the date of liquidation will receive a distribution of their remaining investment value in full liquidation of the Fund. If you have questions or need assistance, please contact your financial advisor directly or the Fund toll-free at 1.877.257.4240.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR RETIREMENT PLAN INVESTORS
If you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax advisor regarding the consequences of any redemption of Fund shares. If you receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA, you must roll the proceeds into another Individual Retirement Account within sixty (60) days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income for the year. If you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) Custodian Account (Tax-Sheltered account) or a Keogh Account, you must roll the distribution into a similar type of retirement plan within sixty (60) days in order to avoid disqualification of your plan and the severe tax consequences that it can bring. If you are the trustee of a Qualified Retirement Plan, you may reinvest the money in any way permitted by the plan and trust agreement.
This Supplement, and the existing Prospectus dated June 30, 2014, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. Both the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information dated June 30, 2014 have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference, and can be obtained without charge by calling the Fund toll-free at 1.877.257.4240.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1215881/000141304214000349/birmiwalcls497.htm
497 1 birmiwalcls497.htm
Birmiwal Oasis Fund
(BIRMX)
Supplement dated December 30, 2014 to the Prospectus dated August 1, 2014
____________________________________________________________________________
The Board of Trustees of the Birmiwal Investment Trust, on behalf of the sole series of the Trust, the Birmiwal Oasis Fund (the "Fund"), has concluded that due to the relatively small size of the Fund, it is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund cease operations. The Board has determined to close the Fund and redeem all remaining outstanding shares on January 30, 2015.
Effective December 30, 2014, the Fund will no longer pursue its stated investment objective. The Fund will begin liquidating its portfolio and will invest in cash equivalents such as money market funds until all shares have been redeemed. Any required distributions of income and capital gains will be distributed as soon as practicable to shareholders and reinvested in additional shares, unless you have previously requested payment in cash. Shares of the Fund are otherwise not available for purchase.
Prior to January 30, 2015, you may redeem your shares, including any reinvested distributions, in accordance with the "Instructions For Selling Fund Shares" section in the Prospectus. Unless your investment in the Fund is through a tax-deferred retirement account, any redemption is subject to tax on any taxable gains. Please refer to the "Taxes" section in the Prospectus for general information. You may wish to consult your tax advisor about your particular situation.
ANY SHAREHOLDERS WHO HAVE NOT REDEEMED THEIR SHARES OF THE FUND PRIOR TO JANUARY 30, 2015, WILL HAVE THEIR SHARES AUTOMATICALLY REDEEMED AS OF THAT DATE, AND PROCEEDS WILL BE SENT TO THE ADDRESS OF RECORD. If you have questions or need assistance, please contact your financial advisor directly or the Fund toll-free at 1-800-417-5525 or the Fund’s adviser, Birmiwal Asset Management, Inc., at 1-206-542-7652.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR RETIREMENT PLAN INVESTORS
If you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax advisor regarding the consequences of any redemption of Fund shares. If you receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA, you must roll the proceeds into another Individual Retirement Account within sixty (60) days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income for the year. If you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) Custodian Account (Tax-Sheltered account) or a Keogh Account, you must roll the distribution into a similar type of retirement plan within sixty (60) days in order to avoid disqualification of your plan and the severe tax consequences that it can bring. If you are the trustee of a Qualified Retirement Plan, you may reinvest the money in any way permitted by the plan and trust agreement.
This Supplement, and the existing Prospectus dated August 1, 2014, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. Both the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information dated August 1, 2014, have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and are incorporated by reference, and can be obtained without charge by calling the Fund toll-free at 1-800-417-5525.

Once or twice a year, I try to find something comparable to FLPSX and fail (at least according to the metrics that matter to me, such as cost, portfolio, etc).
The portfolio is value-leaning, non-large cap, low turnover (12%), 1/3 foreign. IMHO, it's that last factor that explains the relative underperformance the past few years. It's a global stock in all but M* classification. Which is not a bad thing if that's what you want. For that sort of fund, it's doing quite well.
I think I finally did find a possible alternative. Polaris Global Value (PGVFX). But here's the thing - it is classified a global stock, and is somewhat more heavily foreign weighted (60/40 foreign/domestic).
Having more foreign stocks, it doesn't match FLPSX in performance - but it does tend crudely track the same performance curve, and it helps if one wants/needs a bit more foreign exposure. (Since domestic stocks have been outperforming foreign ones, a person's portfolio could easily have tilted "too much" toward domestic.)
It's more tax efficient (both relative to FLPSX, though this may be because it is still sitting on losses from 2008-2009 (per website). On an absolute basis), it falls into the same mid cap value box (though with slightly higher average market cap). Same low turnover (14%).
This has been a fund on my radar for years, but I always considered it too expensive (and in the past have been disinclined to buy global funds). But it has temporarily lowered its ER (it remains to be seen whether the temporary reduction will be renewed).
Finally, unlike FLPSX, one can benefit here from a foreign tax credit. The rule is that if a fund's portfolio is more than 50% foreign, then the fund is allowed to pass the foreign taxes through to you. FLPSX, at 1/3 foreign, can't do that. (Funds are not required to pass through the taxes, but they usually do.)
Just an offbeat thought on a replacement or complement to FLPSX. I'd say it was thinking outside the box, but part of the appeal is that it falls within the same style box.

+1 to msf. I would leave well enough alone, suck it up in April, and certainly not bail on Danoff and Tillinghast based on the last few years, nor even necessarily switch from Fido to Vang (though the CG points are noted). But your position is popular among some, even in the 15% bracket, and I recognize that this might sound argumentative.

Hi David - I appreciate your comments even though I may not agree with all of them. Let's take FLPSX, for example. Tillinghast is very well respected as we all know. However, he is slowly easing away from managing this fund and will not be there forever. If you compared FLPSX with a Vanguard Mid Cap Index fund, say VIMAX, then Tillinghast's fund loses on tax adjusted returns over the 1, 3, 5 and 10 year time periods. Not bad for an index fund. FLPSX loses to VMVAX as well although the latter is a newer fund. Both index funds are more tax efficient as well. UMBMX doesn't come close to either index fund in terms of tax-adjusted returns.
I am in the 25% tax bracket, BTW.

+1 to msf. I would leave well enough alone, suck it up in April, and certainly not bail on Danoff and Tillinghast based on the last few years, nor even necessarily switch from Fido to Vang (though the CG points are noted). But your position is popular among some, even in the 15% bracket, and I recognize that this might sound argumentative.

Thanks for the reply, MSF. Some of the funds I've mentioned have had a record of paying out big distributions, such as FLPSX and UMBMX. Neither one of those funds have performed well over the past three years, either. FCNTX was particularly bad this year as well with a huge distribution. My point is that I would rather settle for slightly lower returns and not get hit with big distributions rather than the other way around. That's just my preference. With the size of my portfolio, I don't need to hit home runs with funds - singles or doubles will suffice. What I don't like is cutting a larger tax check than necessary every April 15.
Your points are well taken and I will certainly take a look at some of those Vanguard ETFs and indexes.

Keep in mind that this year is a bit unusual in terms of distributions.
2013 was a fantastic year. If funds were still sitting on realized but undistributed losses going back to 2008, they all but surely used them up that year. (Funds are required to distribute substantially all of their net gains each year, but if they have losses, they can't distribute them. Instead, they are allowed to use them against gains in future years - I believe for up to ten years.)
Follow that with an above average 2014 (domestically, anyway), and you've got the makings of disproportionately large distributions. It pays to keep things in perspective. For example, FMIJX (FMI Int'l) is in the 2nd percentile for 3 year after tax returns (excluding this year). And this is a very concentrated fund (29 stocks, plus some other securities) - do you want to replace it with a fund that has a gazillion holdings?
Don't overreact to one year's taxes and lose sight of the objective - net return, not minimizing taxes. The latter is easy - don't make money.
If you sell your shares, you'll wind up paying more taxes now (gains on the shares). If you want to make some moves, you might consider taking the distributions in cash, and investing them in newly selected funds.
I would be more inclined to use Vanguard than Fidelity for broad based stock index funds. They tend to have lower cap gains distributions (e.g. Spartan 500 made cap gains distributions this year and in 2007), Spartan Total Market made cap gains distributions in 2007-2010). You don't see these in the Vanguard funds. (Also, the Vanguard funds have ETF shares, so they have the tax advantages of an ETF, with no bid/ask spread.)

Take a look at Vanguard's Tax-Managed Balanced Fund (VTMFX). It is split 50/50 between U.S. stocks and municipal bonds. Good after-tax performance and low expense ratio (0.12%). I replaced VWIAX in my taxable account with VTMFX. Bear in mind, VTMFX is a bit riskier.
Mike_E

Thank you, Mike. Yes, VTMFX is on my radar for sure.